hitting the wire*

spam. irritating. pernicious. illegal. immortal.

Spam and spammers refuse to die.  They are harder to kill than a horse fly!

On Thu 2006/09/21 @ 06:59 AM I sent an unsubscribe request in response to an email from a local institution reputed to be notorious for its propensity for sending you unsolicited emails and claiming you had requested said cyber junk mail on their website.

Subsequent to that I received nothing.  Granted, I do have a number of spam filtering mechanisms protecting me, many resident within the Storm network, the final one lurking on my laptop and regularly washing my mail account on the server before Outlook bustles over to check the server.  I gave no more thought to it.

Yesterday, between 11:09 PM & 11:52 PM, I received no less than 3 promotional items from the very same crowd (using a gmail.com account this time), in which they claim:

"xyz.com complies with the Communications ACT. To opt-out from receiving future newsletters, send an e mail to unsubscribe@XXX.com with unsubscribe in the subject line, or click here and enter the e mail address at which you received this newsletter. All unsubscribe requests are honored within 3 working days."

Today, I received 4 more.

So. 

Bearing in mind that this sort of email makes up 70% to 80% of the mail traffic out there on the Net, gobbling up precious bandwidth we could be using to make the Broadband ecosystem work better, do you think the ECT (as opposed to the EC) Act protects us enough?  (note they mention "the Communications Act" above, which could mean the EC Act, or the ECT Act!)

What do you think I should do gentle reader? 

I have unsubscribed a 2nd time, but should I expend some precious time exploring the legal options open to me?  (This involves a tortuous path through SAPS)

Should I reset the parameters of my spam filters, hunker down and try to ignore the buzzing horse fly that is draining scarce resources?

Should I just mail the sad gits a bunch of dead flowers?

you tell me.

Alan Knott-Craig happy to chair ICASA.

From an ITWeb article today:

“Our regulatory issues are not just about money, it's also about competence. We need people who have industry experience sitting in the regulator. Those with the knowledge need to think about doing their national service in ICASA.”

In response, Mashile joked that Knott-Craig would be the next ICASA chairman.

However, Knott-Craig cut audience amusement short, stating: “For the record, I am very happy to do that.”

Delegates responded with applause.

Must have the current Chairman choking on his own joke!

Much as I don't pretend to like Knott-Craig's management style, it could not fail to inject a certain element of urgency into the regulatory process.  Knowing the inner workings of the industry as he does, not much would get past him, but would he be impartial if he has any personal equity in any of the players?

The rise of a new breed of Service Provider.

My first job in Storm, back in the late 90's was to add a Cellular LCR (Least Cost Routing) product to the International LCR product offering Storm launched with.  We were finding that we were losing deals to the likes of Orion and Telepassport because we did not offer "savings on calls to cellular".  TimWG's words to me were something of the order of "create a cellular product for us and just make sure you don't lose us any money".

None of us saw just how big the Cellular LCR market would be.  None of us realised just  how many more cellular phones than fixed line phones there would be by now.

Cellular LCR has always been a problem for the Mobile Network Operators.  The GSM networks were traditionally designed quite "thin", with some base stations only being able to handle 8 or 16 simultaneous calls from phones "passing through".  Installations of "SIM farms" or large Cellular Fixed Terminal CPE installations had the ability to "flatten" the networks in places.  An installation at PriceWaterhouseCoopers succeeded in causing dropped calls for anyone traveling past their offices in Sandton for weeks after their LCR installation went live.  The networks ended up spending many millions of capex to cater for LCR. 

Much better money was being made in charging Telkom to terminate calls originating in Telkom's network to cell phones.  But the fear of losing the LCR SIM business (and the traffic) to the other MNO network forced Vodacom and MTN to offer the likes of Storm attractive packages.  Once the LCR market had tapered off however, we saw them beef up "off-net" call charges to try and make more margin.  We had to become smarter about how we managed our base of SIMs.

Deregulation and the legalisation of VoIP has changed all of that.  Anyone who is trying to sell you on the idea that traditional cellular LCR is here for many years and it is worth committing yourself to a long term contract is blowing smoke.  The future is in aggregating traffic using either VoIP or once it is available a mix of CPS (Carrier PreSelect) and VoIP and passing traffic over interconnects.  Renewing LCR SIMs from now on is risky business.

The way forward is with the new breed of Voice&Data Service Provider (the EC Act calls them Communication Service Providers), who are geared to make most use of the changes in technology and regulations.  You just have to take a look at the M&A activity (traditional data guys buying voice guys, vice versa, and the likes of Vodacom starting their own ISP) to realise what Storm did years ago - the future is in IP.  LCR will be around for a while yet, unless either DoC or ICASA force some unwise and rather radical changes to interconnect rates.  The UK has one of the most competitive telecoms markets around, and cellular LCR is still alive with the likes of Westlake and True Communications.

Peter Walsh of DataRoom has written a good article on LCR on MyDigitalLife - worth a read if you're interested in a balanced outlook on this market.

UK allows 5.8GHz operators to pump up the power

Total Telecom reports that Ofcom is altering the power rules that govern the use of wireless equipment operating at the 5.8 GHz band in the UK, supposedly to "address the digital divide"

"[Using the 5.8 GHz band] is simply another way of providing broadband other than LLU or cable," said an Ofcom spokeswoman, speaking to Total Telecom on Monday.

Ofcom said that upping the power limits will extend the geographic reach of broadband services on the 5.8 GHz band, meaning more remote and rural areas will have access to high-speed Internet.

Now (a) it is great to see that the UK are allowing use of 5.8 GHz in the way they are:

According to Ofcom, the use of equipment in the 5.8 GHz band is subject to a light licensing regime that allows terminals to be registered with the regulator online.

The spokeswoman explained that the 5.8 GHz band needs only a minimal amount of regulation to protect it from illegal interference.

and (b) it is good to see regulator exploring ways to make better use of existing technology, but can one really call this a divide?

The report showed that 41% of adults living in rural areas have broadband Internet at home compared to 45% of adults in urban areas.

Tsk,tsk... can't have the lads in rural England lagging by 4% now can we?! ;)

But!:

The increase from 2 to 4 watts will lower the cost for operators intending to use the spectrum to deliver fixed wireless broadband services, the U.K. regulator said.

Now as far as I can recall from my days as an Elec Eng student, propagation of electromagnetic signals (using an omnidirectional and not a directional antenna) follow an inverse square law?  Which means doubling the power will increase the reach by only about 40% or so?  And as there is no indication of this use of 4 watts is restricted to urban areas, will doubling the allowable power not cause chaos in urban areas where previously workable solutions will be rendered inoperable?  Will this really make the deployment of rural WiFi networks @ 5.8 GHz more affordable and thus kick that 41% penetration of broadband up significantly?

Maybe the likes of Joe @ Amobia will have some answers for me?

Local Loop Unbundling report now available.

Thanks to Dominic from nicci ferguson inc. for alerting me to the fact that the LLU report is finally up on DoC's website!  I've been camping there everyday since Monday.  Not only is the report there, but the while site has undergone an extreme makeover of some sort!  It was only when the page appeared that I understood Dominic's warning:

"I suggest a pair of dark glasses be worn when first viewing the new effort from the DoC"

Would appear to be much more user friendly and easier to find documents although I can hardly say I've explored it much.  It looks a darn site better.

Well done DoC! 

(There. I've done it. I said something positive about the DoC. ;)

Now the web presence of your organisation looks a hell of a lot better, let's use it to open up dialogue with your stakeholders?  Or is that shooting for the moon?

maybe this explains it.

This is a snapshot of the DoC's site today (2007/05/29).

Notice anything strange about the dates in the "latest" news section?

This is the department whose goal is facilitating communication in our land?

<sigh>  somebody give me something positive to say about the DoC please.

Get your SA government gazettes here... online & free.

Amazing how you can be blissfully unaware of something right under your nose!  Here I was muttering about how painful it is trying to track down a relevant Government Gazette when you want it.  Resorted once again to Dr Google, expecting frustrating results as before when... voila!

A bunch called doclog (who seem to offer various document management systems) offer a free service where they scan the gazettes into .pdf's and make them available for download!  And of course, being .pdf, they are searchable.  

Now that's a good way to win some goodwill - thanks DocLog!

Check it out.

desperately seeking the LLUC report!

If anyone reading this has access to a copy of the Local Loop Unbundling Committee's report that was handed to the Communications Minister last week and was supposed to be up on the DoC website yesterday... please let me know where to find it.

(oh, and I don't have bipolar mania Ryan... I'm permanently manic! ;)

More on "Unbundling the Local Loop" (ULL)

According to Tim (Storm's joint CEO), it was while listening to a story on bipolar mania on Cape Talk that Lindsay from Cape Talk called him to ask him if he'd be prepared to go on air with Mike Wills (no, I'm not mistaken - he really was on air - standing in for John Maytham).  Tim deftly tossed the ball to the first person he thought of... me.  So, while preparing to recount my lifelong experience with bipolar mania, I was somewhat flummoxed to have Mike Wills announce he wanted me to explain what "unbundling the local loop" was!

(ok, I jest - at least about the being flummoxed part - Tim would be quite adept at talking about mania's of any sort! ;)  More of that I am sure when his own blog goes live (oops... there goes the cat!)

Here is a copy of the interview if you're interested.

And I sincerely trust, Mr Halse, that I'm more coherent here than I was in the Business Day article!

That's me. More or less unbundled.

This is what the DoC define as "urgent"?!

The Minister of Communications presented her budget speech yesterday.  I had not had sight of it and had consumed a few glasses of Bloemendal red wine (not to mention sampled a good others) at the ISPA dinner when I was asked for comment by Business Day.  Needless to say, I was not very coherent. 

Much was said, and although there has been movement in certain areas - most notably the eventual promulgation of the EC Act, very little tangible progress has been made on lowering the costs of telecoms and stimulating the growth of broadband.

She uses feel-good extracts from the President's State of the Nation address, but neglects to mention that in a recent interview with the Financial Times of London he said:

"The cost of telecommunications is unbelievably high"

She focuses on unbundling of the local loop (ULL), and states that it is "urgent":

"I HAVE ALSO TAKEN THE POLICY DECISION that, given the complexity of local loop unbundling process on the one hand and the urgency for South Africa to enable all operators appropriately licensed to have access to the local loop on the other, the unbundling process in South Africa should be urgently implemented."

but then states:

"The unbundling process should be completed by 1 November 2011."

I think that sums up the problem for me.  4.5 years is considered "urgent".  What makes it more interesting, is that the process ICASA is pursuing with some uncharacteristic and laudable speed, being the definition of markets, and promulgation of regulations on interconnect and facilities leasing will effectively unbundle the local loop long before 2011 if the process is not derailed.

I wonder how "Accelerated" is defined (as in ASGISA)?  But then if you're starting from a low speed, any increase in forward movement can be defined as "acceleration".

The local loop is indeed one of the bottlenecks in introducing relatively unfettered competition into the SA market, and if the DoC have realised that, it is a positive thing.  However it is realised, it is needed now, not in 2011.

I must remember to revisit this at the end of 2007 and rate progress.